Madison schools boss admits race-based discipline isn’t working

Young people from Madison are marching on Janesville to the home of Speaker Paul Ryan to protest school shooting deaths.

It’s not quite marching on Selma, Alabama, for Civil Rights. Or the Mobe March on Washington 1971 during the Vietnam War protests but, as Marlon Brando said in the Wild Ones, it’s what we’ve got.

The Children’s Crusaders say they don’t feel safe in their schools. If that’s the case, the March Marchers from Madison could take a shortcut and surround Anna Moffit’s house. The lady wants re-election to the Madison School Board where she is a leader in the movement to get armed police out of Madison’s troubled high schools. Including the cop that disarmed the La Follette student who brought a loaded handgun to school.

Instead, the Blaska Policy Werkes recommends putting more cops IN the schools, starting with former cop Gloria Reyes, who is running to replace Ms. Moffit on the school board.

Because a couple dozen parents and students told the Madison School Board one month ago (we recount their pleas here) that THEY don’t feel safe in the schools due to the constant disruptions and fighting (some of which have injured students and teachers).

We said then that the social justice warriors were fixated on race, not results. They are willing to endure chaos in the classrooms in the name of racial equity. Because too many Students Of Color were being suspended. The curse of disparate results. So our liberal-progressive-socialist leaders change the rules to make the numbers work.

Except that the numbers are still not working. Student suspensions are up by one-third and 62% of suspensions are “black or African American” although accounting for 19% of the districtwide enrollment. White students comprised 42% of all students but 13% of suspensions. “The trend in disproportionality in incident events has remained steady when looking at race/ethnicity,” the first semester review summarizes.

Supt. Cheatham advances the Broken Windows theory

Buttons handed out at Madison’s March 14 student walkout to demand gun control. No, it doesn’t have to make sense. Forget it, Jake. It’s Madison.

In a welcome story in this morning’s Wisconsin State Journal, MPS superintendent Jennifer Cheatham acknowledged what we’ve been saying for too many years now: “Fear of being seen as racist may work against good behavior in schools.”

Wary of the race card, teachers are letting the small stuff slide until the misbehavior escalates into big stuff. As the Broken Windows theory of policing predicts.

Sometimes we don’t warn kids of color, because we ourselves are afraid of maybe appearing racist or appearing like we’re picking on kids of color. When (small) things are allowed to get by or continue, students are receiving a message that we don’t actually hold them to high expectations, love and care about them.

Then there’s the issue of single students getting as many as eight, nine suspensions. That kind of dithering sends a powerful message to miscreant and scholar alike: this ain’t serious. Your humble bloggeur was startled when board member T.J. Mertz told him that only three students have been expelled and that those expulsions usually last but one semester.

MPS is considering an alternate school for troublemakers at La Follette H.S. Watch for the social justice warriors to go running to the ACLU if its students are not precisely racially balanced.

We missed the “Expel Cops from our Schools” event March 18 at Festival Foods on East Washington Ave. We have said before, the MPS Behavior Education Plan is too cumbersome, it gets in its own way. It is time to outlaw the collection of data by race.

Obama Justice Department encouraged reverse racism

The Trump administration plans to scrap the Obama Administration directives that “turned schools into war zones,” as the colorful New York Post puts it.

The federal directive, issued jointly in 2014 by the US departments of Education and Justice, warned public school districts receiving federal funding — including New York City — that they could face investigation and funding cuts if they fail to reduce statistical “disparities” in discipline by race. On average, the administration noted, black students are suspended at three times the rate of their white peers.

The directive also discourages student arrests and holds districts liable for the actions of “school resource officers … or other law enforcement personnel.”

”Sometimes we don’t warn kids of color, because we ourselves are afraid of maybe appearing racist or appearing like we’re picking on kids of color.”

But, but, but, but, but, but, but, but isn’t treating people differently because of the color of their skin the very definition of raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacist?

Hate to break it to the purpose-driven, Madison/Dane County SJW contingent, but treating people differently because of their race in order to [b]not[/b] appear to be racist, is a pretty serious disconnect from a reality-based Universe.

And if that’s really the reason, welp, we have proff-positive that the inmates are running the asylum!

Liberals are so fixated on their utopian fantasies they’ll endorse any policy, no matter how wrongheaded, in order to realize their vision. In their world, the percentages have to align exactly whatever the factors, If blacks commit disproportionately more crimes than whites, then the books have to be cooked somehow–anyhow–so the numbers align in ways that fit their cozy notions of “equality.” They find the idea of cops in schools distasteful, so they’ve got to go. You can show them the facts that show the Maryland shooting was indisputable disrupted by an armed security guard and it makes no difference. Image trumps reality every time. As for other social issues dear to their hearts, the “solutions” they advocate sound like the kind of answers a child would give–and a not-very-bright child at that. How to address homelessness? GIve them all homes. Jail overcrowding? Let the criminals go. Minority students are disrupting class and threatening teachers at a higher rate than white students? Give them a free pass. Gun violence? Confiscate guns. Justice for victims of sexual assault? Dispense with due process and condemn the accused on the word of their accusers alone. Illegal immigrants? Sanctuary cities/states. Welfare recipients: Deny them any opportunity for training or education that might help to free themselves from government dependency.
I used to think liberalism was just another political viewpoint; I’m beginning to think it’s some kind of infantile mental disorder.The only thing I can attribute it to is a profound misunderstanding of human nature coupled with an infinite self-regard.

And as for poor little David Hogg. When he first became the spokesman for Parkland students mobilizing to end school violence, he came across as a thoughtful, articulate young man. Now he’s morphed into the poster boy for the radical left, as the quote above demonstrates all too well. A couple of days ago,I saw him doing an interview–actually a spittle-laced screed against the NRA–in which every other word was the F-bomb. Of course the main reason they value him as a spokesman for anti-gun extremism is that anyone who utters a peep of criticism directed at him can instantly be branded a right-wing hater who is verbally abusing a helpless young student. After graduation, young Mr. Hogg should enroll at UW-Madison, where his brand of “activism” will ensure him a fan-base much wider than anything he enjoyed in high-school..He could even turn out to be his generation’s answer to Paul Soglin. What’s that old saying from Marx about how history repeats itself?

Pick up a copy of: THE LIBERAL MIND: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness (Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., M.D.)

“The radical left’s efforts to regulate the people from cradle to grave. To rescue us from our troubled lives, the liberal agenda:
*recommends denial of personal responsibility,
*encourages self-pity and other-pity,
*fosters government dependency,
*promotes sexual indulgence,
*rationalizes violence,
*excuses financial obligation,
*justifies theft,
*ignores rudeness,
*prescribes complaining and blaming,
*denigrates marriage and the family,
*legalizes all abortion,
*defies religious and social tradition,
*declares inequality unjust, and
*rebels against the duties of citizenship.

“Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone’s material welfare, provide for everyone’s healthcare, protect everyone’s self-esteem, correct everyone’s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions.

“Radical liberalism thus assaults the foundations of civilized freedom. Given its irrational goals, coercive methods and historical failures, and given its perverse effects on character development, there can be no question of the radical agenda’s madness.

“Only an irrational agenda would advocate a systematic destruction of the foundations on which ordered liberty depends.”

No. Conservatives don’t fear change but we insist on function over form, unlike you. Too much of what you’d describe as “change” is just abusing power. Obamacare comes to mind. The fear Progs so often detect in others is their own. They are afraid to admit it.

AnonyBob wrote, “Boys, hate to break it to you, but many consider conservatives’ irrational fear of change (it’s not such a WASPy world any longer) to be a mental disorder.”

It’s not a “fear” of change and it’s not irrational either you XXX XXX; it’s having enough intellect to know that a change is not always necessary or prudent to achieve an outcome. Progressives simply do not have the ability to intellectually discern when change is actually necessary. Change is an obsession for Progressives, they MUST change for the sake of change and anyone that disagrees with their obsession to change things is falsely labeled as having an irrational fear of change. Progressives, and you, are unethical political hacks.

Oops, I completely forgot about the banning of the F word. No excuses, I apologize for using it.

It’s your blog, do with it as you please; however, with all due respect, I think you’re wrong about banning the use of the word troll. The word troll, it a word just like many others that defines what a person is doing.

Troll:Those that post inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, often for their own amusement.

Wrong as usual, boys. A vote for Trump was a vote against change. It was a vote against gay marriage, a vote against the colored folk gettin’ anything, a vote against uppity women, a vote against an Information economy, a vote against anyone holding power besides old, white men.
(And Splat, healthcare reform/Obamacare is winning elections for Democrats. Let THAT sink in.)

No ABob, we had all that and said “No more”. We also had Chicago levels of corruption and incompetence. 65% of voters said the country was on the wrong track and a comically out of touch Hillary said,’four more years’.
Bill Clinton knew this and nailed Obamacare shortly before the election.
Thanks for the memory.

AnonyBob wrote, “Wrong as usual, boys. A vote for Trump was a vote against change. It was a vote against gay marriage, a vote against the colored folk gettin’ anything, a vote against uppity women, a vote against an Information economy, a vote against anyone holding power besides old, white men.”

“Wrong as usual, boys. A vote for Trump was a vote against change. It was a vote against gay marriage, a vote against the colored folk gettin’ anything, a vote against uppity women, a vote against an Information economy, a vote against anyone holding power besides old, white men.”

Remember that bobo is half troll half human.
He launches his incendiary word bombs and gets off on responses.
On the upside; at least we give his life some kind of meaning.

Batty: I’ll admit – so true! But some would suggest you bozos face the truth, this is what debate looks like. It forces you to face opinions you don’t agree with, something you won’t get from Alex Jones, Mark Levine or FOX. Really, my suggestion that a vote for Trump was a vote for “the way things used to be” is not outside of the mainstream.
Daverino, I’m disappointed in your response. You know I’m more right than that.

Bobo says: “I’ll admit – so true!” that he is half troll half human.
Making progress here with a refractory mind is no small thing.

And then mentally limping along bobo utters: “But some would suggest you bozos face the truth, this is what debate looks like.”
Ahh no bobo, not THE truth but rather your version of it, and trolls like you do not debate but rather snipe without offering any substantive counter argument.

I have a challenge for you and your big brain.
From now on after reading a Blaska post; offer a thoughtful persuasive explanation why you disagree and do the same with other comments.

Pretend you are back in school being graded if it helps.
I really think you can do this if you genuinely try. Do not be afraid.
Batman has faith in you…

Batman Rules wrote, “I have a challenge for you and your big brain.
From now on after reading a Blaska post; offer a thoughtful persuasive explanation why you disagree and do the same with other comments.”

I think you may be forgetting something, just because someone has a big brain doesn’t mean that that brain has the intellect to generate a “thoughtful persuasive explanation” of anything, robbing a term from a comment I read years ago, that “big brain” could be a Sasquatch Brain.

“my suggestion that a vote for Trump was a vote for “the way things used to be” is not outside of the mainstream”, sure rings true, evidenced by the trump motto MAGA. (hint to the unwashed; the second A is for “again”).

Sovereign borders, again.
Growing economy, again.
Rule of law, again.
Law and order, again.
Friend to our friends, again.
Enemy with teeth and resolve, again.
No boys in the girl’s bathrooms, again.
Due process and free speech in public universities again.
More competence, less corruption in government, Again.
No president Clinton, again.

How’s that wall doing?
ACA still in place
Infrastructure: Let the locals pay for it
Sovereign borders: always been there
Law and order: How many have pleaded guilty in the Mueller investigation?
Due process: recall what the donald said re taking guns
“I only hire the best”: check out the revolving door at the WH

old baldy,
You are using that old Salem Witch Trial School of Thinking, which is where underlying thoughts of a person causes them to throw out all logical reasoning and conclude the absurd.

old baldy wrote, How’s that wall doing?

Does the word OBSTRUCTION have any meaning to you at all?

old baldy wrote, ACA still in place.

Really old baldy, you want to go there even after so many Republicans have stated that it should remain in place and stripped of it mandates until they have a decent plan to replace it? Then there is that annoying word that fully describes Progressives to a “T” – OBSTRUCTION.

old baldy wrote, Infrastructure: Let the locals pay for it

Again; OBSTRUCTION? If you had any integrity whatsoever you would openly acknowledge that the political left is literally obstructing this from happening even though infrastructure spending is right up their Socialist alley. The political left are awash with double standards and hypocrisy.

old baldy wrote, Sovereign borders: always been there

Other than the fact that the word sovereign is really being misused (look up the word folks); the argument that our borders are secure absolutely absurd, the argument is a clear example of Potemkin Rhetoric. Anyone with any ability to think beyond their own partisan tunnel vision knows damn good and well that the United States borders are not secure and anyone arguing otherwise is an absolute partisan fool. There is an estimated 11 million (11,000,000) illegal immigrants in the United States and a huge portion of those illegal immigrants have come across our borders illegally because our borders are NOT secure.

old baldy wrote, “Law and order: How many have pleaded guilty in the Mueller investigation?”

Your statement as a counter to madisonexpat statement “Law and order, again.” is self defeating.

1. Madisonexpat statement implies that law and order is being enforced where it hadn’t been before, and your statement is evidence to support that argument. Was it your intent to support madisonexpat’s argument?

2. You argument has underlying implications that these guilty pleas are about collusion since that’s what Mueller is supposed to be investigating, the implication is FALSE.

3. The purpose of Mueller’s investigation is to investigate Russian collusion.
There has not been any evidence to support collusion with Russia and to my knowledge no one has plead guilty to collusion; so your underlying implication of Russian collusion guilt is categorically false!

old baldy wrote, “Due process: recall what the donald said re taking guns”

I think you’re fishing without a hook but do try and explain to us what the heck it is you’re talking about here.

old baldy wrote, “‘I only hire the best’: check out the revolving door at the WH”

In some aspects this argument is fair, in other aspects this argument is nonsense.

The fair part: It isn’t politically correct to get rid of people not doing the job you expect of them and in politics it’s political fodder for the opposition even if the person “fired” was clearly not doing the job as expected. As for anti-Trumpers, Trump can do no right, period so it doesn’t matter what Trump does it will always be wrong in the eyes of the anti-Trumper political hacks.

The nonsense part: You’re implying that none of these people should have lost their jobs, that is nonsense. If someone in a position is not performing up to the standards you expect of them you get rid of them. Leaving a person in a position because there may be negative political fallout and it might negatively effect future political campaigns is absolutely insane. There is a job to be done, the job must be done to your satisfaction, if the person is not meeting expectations then get rid of them!

old baldy wrote, “splat, you really need to keep up with the news..”

madisonexpat has obviously kept up with the news, you on the other hand are just like all Trump haters and Progressives, you are only out to make that which is positive look negative. This kind of attitude will loose you one election after another. Keep it up, losers!

old baldy wrote, “Again, how is that wall going? Answer for either or both the one at the Mexican border, or the one walker proposed for Canadians.”

Walker never proposed to build a wall on the Canadian border.

It’s remarkable how many times that idiots from the political left will present things as fact that are actually proven to be lies. Claims that Walker proposed a Canadian border wall is either evidence of Progressive Magical Thinking or more simply trolling by a political hack.

I’m not sure if your trolling is worse than AnonyBob’s or if they’re equivalent? Wait; maybe you’re the same human being hiding behind different pseudonyms.

Z-boy, as a short-lived Presidential candidate, Walker did say a wall along the Canadian border should be considered.
And let me give you a tip: people in these parts tend to argue more with a scalpel than a cudgel. Obscenities and name-calling raise the proprietor’s ire. And he’ll hate it if you make him agree with me on this.

AnonyBob wrote, “Walker did say a wall along the Canadian border should be considered.”

AnonyBob that’s not any kind of equivalency to “walker proposed”.

Here is what Walker actually said.

Todd:“Do you want to build a wall north of the border, too?”

Walker: “Some people have asked us about that in New Hampshire. They raised some very legitimate concerns, including some law enforcement folks that brought that up to me at one of our town hall meetings about a week and a half ago. So that is a legitimate issue for us to look at.”

To be absolutely blunt; all issues regarding border security are legitimate issues to look at and discuss, you can toss out those that don’t seem to make sense after looking into them and/or discussing them directly. Any statement or implications contrary to that fact are ignorant.

AnonyBob wrote, “And let me give you a tip: people in these parts tend to argue more with a scalpel than a cudgel. Obscenities and name-calling raise the proprietor’s ire. And he’ll hate it if you make him agree with me on this.”

Quite frankly Bob; tips from people that troll websites using partisan drivel to instigate arguments aren’t worth pixel mass required to project their tips on a computer monitor. Furthermore; Dave has shown us that he is quite capable of stating exactly what he thinks are acceptable and unacceptable comments or portions of comments on his blog, he doesn’t need the likes of you to speak for him.

old baldy wrote, “Manufacturers and ag producers are in a panic because of the tariff proposals.”

The sky is falling, the sky is falling!

Horsepocky!

I’m affiliated with a manufacturer that uses all kinds of steel and aluminum and there is absolutely no panic. Heck these people you say are panicking have been complaining for YEARS that places like China have screwed up the steel markets and put people in the USA out of work. For the record; cost of raw materials like steel and aluminum are like a roller coaster, always have been and always will be. When the cost of raw materials go up coming in the door the price of the finished goods going out the door are adjusted and/or some of the increase is simply absorbed knowing full well that competition and volume will drive the prices back down and it works in the reverse when raw material prices go down.

Ag producers profit/cost issues are a much larger roller coaster ride and they always have been that way, well except when idiots in our government pay producers NOT to produce as much, which is absolute insanity! The world needs to eat, the ag producers will do just fine.

Guess we have to disagree. Just here in WI Harley is quite concerned about the steel and aluminum tariffs. Ag, especially dairy, are all up in arms. You really should stay current. But that would cause considerable cog-dis in that little (or is it liddle?) noggin of yours.

old baldy wrote, “Guess we have to disagree. Just here in WI Harley is quite concerned about the steel and aluminum tariffs. Ag, especially dairy, are all up in arms. You really should stay current. But that would cause considerable cog-dis in that little (or is it liddle?) noggin of yours.”

Did anyone else with a fully functioning brain notice that not a word of old baldy’s comment contradicted anything I wrote. He’s got nothing but partisan talking points, propaganda, and insults. Talk about “classy”.

One-third of State Street business will not re-open

Quit bashing police

Milwaukee Police Chief Alfonso Morales said he’s tired of people using the George Floyd protest to cause destruction and emphasized that violence against his officers must stop. — More here.

Today in Media Bias

Lisa Page, the former FBI lawyer who resigned in the midst of the Russian investigation scandal, has been hired a NBC and MSNBC as a legal analyst. The move continues a trend started by CNN in hiring Trump critics, including officials terminated for misconduct, to offer legal analysis on the Trump Administration. We have previously discussed the use by CNN of figures like Andrew McCabe to give legal analysis despite his being referred for possible criminal charges by the Inspector General for repeatedly lying to federal investigators. The media appears intent on fulfilling the narrative of President Trump that it is overly biased and hostile in its analysis. … Page is still part of investigation by various committees and the investigation being conducted by U.S Attorney John Durham. — Jonathan Turley

Get Blog e-mailed!

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.